Googled. Wow, Very cool.
Dude, donât put words in my mouth and then insult me⌠seriously, just stop.
Women-run kickstarters getting lots of hate is pretty common. See all the sexist remarks made towards the creator of Bee and Puppycat, calling her a ripoff, saying sheâs unoriginal and boring, that people are only donating to the campaign because sheâs a woman, etc.
Also, maybe if less hateful misogynists were screaming and going crazy, then there could be a reasonable discussion. But when people are posting false tweets from her claiming she spent the money in ways she didnât, games where you physically abuse her, immediately commenting on her appearance⌠etc. So yeah, that muddies the water a bit. You kind of just have to deal with it, because at least you arenât dealing with the rampant sexism and hate.
Hell, thunderfoot, the video you mention confuses fantasy with reality to a point of severe delusion, and yes, uses clips from things without crediting them. He even claims that a character isnât a helpless damsel in distress because at the very very end of the game, after the final boss is dead and you rescue her, she punches the badguy in the dick. Thatâs an actual claim! Dude is crazy and should not be listened to.
Plus, at the very least, sheâs made videos, that the supporters of her seem pretty damn happy with. They got what they paid for. Howâs that Tropes vs Men video series coming?
I just googled, and her KS goal was $6000; seems reasonable to cover the time, effort etc. of producing the videos, in fact itâs quite cheap!
I can certainly entertain that notion. However, the mere possibility of having terrible motives doesnât seem to me â and I understand that this might be an idiosyncratic preference â to justify actually assuming those terrible motives apply. One could apply the principle of charity, assume good faith, and address her arguments on their merits rather than straining at narratives that paint Sarkeesian as a villain.
Seeing that so many people are tripping over themselves to paint her as a villain I think there may be some room in this discussion to advocate for assumptions of good faith. After all, the signal to noise ratio in these accusations of bad faith is incredibly low and the evidence on which youâre basing your assertions that she has terrible motives are â and again, just an opinion here â pretty fucking weak.
Youâre assuming that the time or effort of a woman is actually worth anything and valued by her detractors. Big mistake with that assumption. There are LOTS of people arguing that she should have just made them for free, and itâs wrong of her to do things like try to make money to feed herself.
Oh shit, youâre citing a thunderfoot video and implying Sarkeesian is the one with malevolent intent? Maybe you should check into thunderfootâs motivations before drawing too many conclusions from his videos.
My point is that men being the default is made worse by hamfistedly adding female characters with bows on their heads in later versions, where it could just as easily have been addressed by having more characters like the white bird, who is obviously female when you know her species (a hen who lays eggs), but doesnât have the stereotypical human gender features (bow, lipstick, rouge, eyelashes, hearts, angst). As it was, they just decided to add another female white bird with all of those features instead.
We agree. Gender tropes are damaging to all genders.
I fail to see how âIâm not attacking this topic, butâŚâ is any different than someone saying âIâm not racist, but âŚâ
If something canât be talked critically about without âattackingâ it, then that thing deserves to be attacked.
Research shows that delivery room nurses treat newborn babies differently by gender: boys are handled more roughly and not spoken to as much, while girls receive a lot more baby talk and cooing and are treated more gently.
If even the experience AT BIRTH is gendered, why would you think your children made it to toddlerhood and beyond without ever experiencing and internalizing the gendered society they live in?
Analysis of racism on this board also causes massive misunderstanding too.
Language is tricky.
And does she say those exact words âIâm not attacking this topic, butâŚâ
Sorry to reuse an example, but surely you canât conclude from the hundreds of specific criticisms Roger Ebert has made about specific films that Roger Ebert hated the film medium and devoted his life to attacking it.
Iâm also going to guess that you donât have a problem with teachers correcting grammar and spelling and that you probably wouldnât take such corrections as âattacksâ on the student or her abilities.
There is such a thing as constructive criticism.
I had a hard time not finding that fact that one of the examples of a positive non-gendered female character was a completely featureless rectangle. Thatâs pretty damn reductive.
Honestly, it looks like sheâs in drag in the second picture. Whereas she just looks like a chicken in the first. A chicken in drag, yeesh.
Every time Anita comes up, I make the same observations. Her disclaimer undermines her point, at least to me, but Iâve heard plenty of bs âI think all races are equal, but isnât it funny that âŚâ-type disclaimers, so I might be overly suspicious of any presenter that feels the need to throw a disclaimer upfront. Also, her research is shallow and/or cherry-picked to support her narrative.
I agree with her underlying point, a single Soul Caliber add featuring Ivyâs ass to convince any sane individual that the industry has problems.
Ebert never saw the need to disclaim his work.
Every time her work comes up I make the same point too. You can not like her work, thats fine. (And lets be clear, weâre talking about her work, not her as a person.) But not talking about sexism in games doesnât make the sexism go away, it just makes it quieter, and the sexism is still there.
I think one could make the point that not talking about sexism in games actually makes the sexism itself louder.